P. Derek Overfield PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

There is a radical difference between
even the most developed of these concepts and that
of the NT.
In the NT resurrection was not merely
proclaimed as the triumph at some future time of one
man over death, but was the resurrection of the believer
into the heavens, and, more specifically of Christ to
41
the right hand of God which had already taken place.
It is precisely this, at least in as much as it concerns
the resurrection of Christ, that is claimed in
137
Acts 2:22-36 as the following motif-analysis shows.
The major christological emphasis in
the pericope is the-assertion that the Jesus who was
crucified xa.t xup~ov a.~'t~v· xa.t XpLO"t()V ~'1to'ljO""ev 0
ez6, ;
this has been accomplished by God raising
him up from death (v. 32).
This is not a Lucan
motif;
for Luke Jesus is Christ the Lord from his
nativity (Lk 2:11) and it is as Christ that he suffers
(Lk 24:26,46; Acts 3:18, 17:3, 26:23). Further to
this it is significant that events which are, in this
passage, associated directly with resurrection are
elsewhere in Acts treated as separate events.
These
are resurrection as ascension (v. 34) which elsewhere
is treated as an event quite separate from resurrection
(1:6-11) and the resurrection as the outpouring of
the Spirit (v. 33) which Luke earlier associated with
Pentecost (2:1-4).
On the negative side, we must
-60-